location, location, location...

after pondering involvement with the poor and the word "involvement" itself, i've developed a theory about myself. its easier for me to see poverty and oppertunity to engage that very poverty when its at least an arms length away. usually its much more than an arms length in fact. trees in china, aids in africa, orphans in peru, street kids in thailand (not that i'm involved with these things)... all these occupy my brain and spark an adventure nerve. but what of the poverty in my personal space?

its easier for some of us to imagine helping the poor in another country, which isn't at all bad. in fact, some are called by god to go to these places. but some get discouraged because of an inability to travel to russia or india. others don't actually DO anything because of eyes only looking to future "trips" or information about the newest "trendy" activism adventure. and we miss the needy in front of our faces. we cannot think globally and fail to act locally.

the early church was said to "not have a needy one among them..." because the rich were involved with the lives of the less rich. they shared. they ate together. and they did so in their own community. can we imagine what our churches would look like if people said, "wow. there isn't a need unmet by that church." what would happen if the church indeed thought and dreamed globally while ACTING locally? what are the needs of those in our space, those close to us, the ones we can touch?